DC statehood Megathread (pg 33 - Manchin questioning constitutionality)

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Watching all the red avatars getting mad that their power grab failed is the perfect indictment of U.S. politics.

A power grab is refusing to a sit a Supreme Court justice for 10 months.

A power grab is actively trying to have electoral college votes thrown out cause you’re mad you lost.

Giving representation to the most taxed 700k residents in the nation is not a power grab just because it happens to benefit the party which you oppose.

I never said it was only Democrats who engaged in power grabs. But this right here certainly is an example of them doing just that.

The "power grab" is Republicans not letting the Americans who live in DC have the same rights as any other American.

What rights are those? Electing senators isn’t a right.

Sometimes I wonder what people who don’t believe in democracy are doing on an elections forum.

[TheReckoning]

Watching all the red avatars getting mad that their power grab failed is the perfect indictment of U.S. politics.

A power grab is refusing to a sit a Supreme Court justice for 10 months.

A power grab is actively trying to have electoral college votes thrown out cause you’re mad you lost.

Giving representation to the most taxed 700k residents in the nation is not a power grab just because it happens to benefit the party which you oppose.

I never said it was only Democrats who engaged in power grabs. But this right here certainly is an example of them doing just that.

The "power grab" is Republicans not letting the Americans who live in DC have the same rights as any other American.

What rights are those? Electing senators isn’t a right.

Sometimes I wonder what people who don’t believe in democracy are doing on an elections forum.

Tell me where in the U.S. Constitution does it give all American citizens the unconditional right to elect people to the U.S. Senate.

You’ll be looking for a long time.

[VBM]

Watching all the red avatars getting mad that their power grab failed is the perfect indictment of U.S. politics.

A power grab is refusing to a sit a Supreme Court justice for 10 months.

A power grab is actively trying to have electoral college votes thrown out cause you’re mad you lost.

Giving representation to the most taxed 700k residents in the nation is not a power grab just because it happens to benefit the party which you oppose.

I never said it was only Democrats who engaged in power grabs. But this right here certainly is an example of them doing just that.

The "power grab" is Republicans not letting the Americans who live in DC have the same rights as any other American.

What rights are those? Electing senators isn’t a right.

Sometimes I wonder what people who don’t believe in democracy are doing on an elections forum.

Tell me where in the U.S. Constitution does it give all American citizens the unconditional right to elect people to the U.S. Senate.

You’ll be looking for a long time.

It doesn’t need to be written in the Constitution. It’s basic human decency

[7,052,770]

What rights are those? Electing senators isn’t a right.

Yikes. I'll at least give you credit for saying the quiet part out loud, but your position is antithetical to American values in my eyes.

Be honest with yourself. Democrats couldn’t care less about giving people voting rights. If they did, they would’ve made DC a state in 2009, when they had full Control of Congress. So why are they doing it now? 3 words.

Power, power, power.

They should have made it a state in 2009, but the movement wasn't as strong then. For example, DC's 86% vote in favor of statehood didn't happen until 2016.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

After 2022 with Fetterman and Nelson coming to Senate they will pass DC Statehood, the H can still be won by D's and it will be a 54/48 Senate

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Watching all the red avatars getting mad that their power grab failed is the perfect indictment of U.S. politics.

A power grab is refusing to a sit a Supreme Court justice for 10 months.

A power grab is actively trying to have electoral college votes thrown out cause you’re mad you lost.

Giving representation to the most taxed 700k residents in the nation is not a power grab just because it happens to benefit the party which you oppose.

I never said it was only Democrats who engaged in power grabs. But this right here certainly is an example of them doing just that.

The "power grab" is Republicans not letting the Americans who live in DC have the same rights as any other American.

What rights are those? Electing senators isn’t a right.

Sometimes I wonder what people who don’t believe in democracy are doing on an elections forum.

Tell me where in the U.S. Constitution does it give all American citizens the unconditional right to elect people to the U.S. Senate.

You’ll be looking for a long time.

Tell me where the Constitution defined the limits of what a democracy is.

[TheReckoning]

Watching all the red avatars getting mad that their power grab failed is the perfect indictment of U.S. politics.

A power grab is refusing to a sit a Supreme Court justice for 10 months.

A power grab is actively trying to have electoral college votes thrown out cause you’re mad you lost.

Giving representation to the most taxed 700k residents in the nation is not a power grab just because it happens to benefit the party which you oppose.

I never said it was only Democrats who engaged in power grabs. But this right here certainly is an example of them doing just that.

The "power grab" is Republicans not letting the Americans who live in DC have the same rights as any other American.

What rights are those? Electing senators isn’t a right.

Sometimes I wonder what people who don’t believe in democracy are doing on an elections forum.

Tell me where in the U.S. Constitution does it give all American citizens the unconditional right to elect people to the U.S. Senate.

You’ll be looking for a long time.

Tell me where the Constitution defined the limits of what a democracy is.

Tell me how that’s at all relevant to whether or not DC not having senators is unconstitutional.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Watching all the red avatars getting mad that their power grab failed is the perfect indictment of U.S. politics.

A power grab is refusing to a sit a Supreme Court justice for 10 months.

A power grab is actively trying to have electoral college votes thrown out cause you’re mad you lost.

Giving representation to the most taxed 700k residents in the nation is not a power grab just because it happens to benefit the party which you oppose.

I never said it was only Democrats who engaged in power grabs. But this right here certainly is an example of them doing just that.

The "power grab" is Republicans not letting the Americans who live in DC have the same rights as any other American.

What rights are those? Electing senators isn’t a right.

Sometimes I wonder what people who don’t believe in democracy are doing on an elections forum.

Tell me where in the U.S. Constitution does it give all American citizens the unconditional right to elect people to the U.S. Senate.

You’ll be looking for a long time.

Tell me where the Constitution defined the limits of what a democracy is.

Tell me how that’s at all relevant to whether or not DC not having senators is unconstitutional.

Is that really what I said? Maybe go back and read it over again.

[emailking]

I think an amendment would be needed if the entirety DC became a state, but if you carve out a small area for the federal district like this does I don't think an amendment is needed. An amendment should be passed after it becomes a state though to remove the 3 EV from the then depopulated federal district.

[Virginiá]

What rights are those? Electing senators isn’t a right.

Be honest with yourself. Democrats couldn’t care less about giving people voting rights. If they did, they would’ve made DC a state in 2009, when they had full Control of Congress. So why are they doing it now? 3 words.

Power, power, power.

They did try, and it was crafted to appease Republicans but died due to an unrelated amendment concerning gun control in DC. Nothing about what happened screams "power, power, power":

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-house-finally-voted-to-support-dc-statehood-its-a-needed-step/2019/03/12/f171771c-4434-11e9-8aab-95b8d80a1e4f_story.html

A promising and pragmatic bipartisan effort to give the District a voting member in the House, balanced against an additional seat for the traditionally Republican state of Utah, was sabotaged in 2009 by inclusion of a poisonous amendment that would have overturned the city’s gun-control laws.

As is true with many policy proposals, the idea of shrinking the district and creating a state from the rest needed time to make the rounds and gain support from lawmakers, activists and other proponents.

This whole situation would be downright amusing if it weren't sad for the people in DC. To the GOP, any Democrat proposing statehood is just after power. Ironically, as explicitly stated by numerous Republican lawmakers, it's also clear that the reason for intense resistance to this idea among Republicans is because of two new Democratic Senators (or power).

How is DC ever supposed to get representation in Congress in this case? This is how you end up with Democrats just saying saying to ram statehood through. Republicans are never going to support it because they don't want to empower their opposition. Meanwhile, there isn't exactly an avalanche of Democratic Senators kicking down Manchin's door to beat him into submission on statehood, even knowing it would make their ability to pass their agenda easier. In fact, HR1 and DC statehood are beginning to fall to the wayside, priority-wise.

Doesn't sound like Democrats are all about "power, power, power."

[It’s so Joever]

I think an amendment would be needed if the entirety DC became a state, but if you carve out a small area for the federal district like this does I don't think an amendment is needed. An amendment should be passed after it becomes a state though to remove the 3 EV from the then depopulated federal district.

Better yet, give the 3 EV to the district and have the winner of the EVs determined by a fistfight on the Senate floor between the senators of each side.

[TheReckoning]

What rights are those? Electing senators isn’t a right.

Be honest with yourself. Democrats couldn’t care less about giving people voting rights. If they did, they would’ve made DC a state in 2009, when they had full Control of Congress. So why are they doing it now? 3 words.

Power, power, power.

They did try, and it was crafted to appease Republicans but died due to an unrelated amendment concerning gun control in DC. Nothing about what happened screams "power, power, power":

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-house-finally-voted-to-support-dc-statehood-its-a-needed-step/2019/03/12/f171771c-4434-11e9-8aab-95b8d80a1e4f_story.html

A promising and pragmatic bipartisan effort to give the District a voting member in the House, balanced against an additional seat for the traditionally Republican state of Utah, was sabotaged in 2009 by inclusion of a poisonous amendment that would have overturned the city’s gun-control laws.

As is true with many policy proposals, the idea of shrinking the district and creating a state from the rest needed time to make the rounds and gain support from lawmakers, activists and other proponents.

This whole situation would be downright amusing if it weren't sad for the people in DC. To the GOP, any Democrat proposing statehood is just after power. Ironically, as explicitly stated by numerous Republican lawmakers, it's also clear that the reason for intense resistance to this idea among Republicans is because of two new Democratic Senators (or power).

How is DC ever supposed to get representation in Congress in this case? This is how you end up with Democrats just saying saying to ram statehood through. Republicans are never going to support it because they don't want to empower their opposition. Meanwhile, there isn't exactly an avalanche of Democratic Senators kicking down Manchin's door to beat him into submission on statehood, even knowing it would make their ability to pass their agenda easier. In fact, HR1 and DC statehood are beginning to fall to the wayside, priority-wise.

Doesn't sound like Democrats are all about "power, power, power."

I never said it wasn’t equally a power grab among Republicans as well. Of course it is. But when both moves are power grabs, I just feel like keeping things the same is better than changing 240 years of precedent.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

dC Statehood is Moot, when you don't see Cookie Damage blogging, you know it's over, Manchin said it crystal clear he isn't voting for DC as is written

The Ds have to win the Next Election cycle, H is gonna be tricky to win, but Biden has the same exact Approvals he had on Election day and D's will have a 51/48 Senate with WARNOCK going to a Runoff, DC Statehood will have to wait til 2023

[brucejoel99]

I think an amendment would be needed if the entirety DC became a state, but if you carve out a small area for the federal district like this does I don't think an amendment is needed. An amendment should be passed after it becomes a state though to remove the 3 EV from the then depopulated federal district.

Honestly, an amendment probably wouldn't even be needed for that either. The Constitution didn't actually provide for a requirement that the Capital be its own thing, only that Congress could provide for such a district to serve as the seat of government if it so chose, which it did, but not 'til 1800. Remember: NYC was the 1st capital, & then it was Philly from 1790-1800.

[It’s so Joever]

Hey Indyrep, where are you? You can’t hold forever! How’s the Manchin being a partisan Dem going?

[Stockdale for Veep]

I think an amendment would be needed if the entirety DC became a state, but if you carve out a small area for the federal district like this does I don't think an amendment is needed. An amendment should be passed after it becomes a state though to remove the 3 EV from the then depopulated federal district.

Better yet, give the 3 EV to the district and have the winner of the EVs determined by a fistfight on the Senate floor between the senators of each side.

Now we need to do a top 5 / bottom 5 power ranking.

Tester clearly an unbeatable titan.

[Morning in Atlas]

Imo the right way to deal with Manchin's opposition and make everyone happy would be to reunify West Virginia and Virginia

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Imo the right way to deal with Manchin's opposition and make everyone happy would be to reunify West Virginia and Virginia

Wouldn’t that make New Virginia a red state?

[ibagli]

Imo the right way to deal with Manchin's opposition and make everyone happy would be to reunify West Virginia and Virginia

Wouldn’t that make New Virginia a red state?

It would be a swing state (Obama-Romney-Trump-Biden) that would eventually slide away from Republicans due to the suburbs and poor growth in Appalachia, assuming current trends continued. Which is basically what happened in real Virginia, just later. I think it would still have been to the right of the country in 2020, though, so that would quite possibly make both the electoral college and Senate harder for Democrats in the short/medium term.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

How about we secede DC to Wyoming?

It more than doubles the WY population.

[Pericles]

Imo the right way to deal with Manchin's opposition and make everyone happy would be to reunify West Virginia and Virginia

Sure this is a joke, but eliminating your Senate majority is a terrible idea.

[Badger]

What rights are those? Electing senators isn’t a right.

Be honest with yourself. Democrats couldn’t care less about giving people voting rights. If they did, they would’ve made DC a state in 2009, when they had full Control of Congress. So why are they doing it now? 3 words.

Power, power, power.

They did try, and it was crafted to appease Republicans but died due to an unrelated amendment concerning gun control in DC. Nothing about what happened screams "power, power, power":

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-house-finally-voted-to-support-dc-statehood-its-a-needed-step/2019/03/12/f171771c-4434-11e9-8aab-95b8d80a1e4f_story.html

A promising and pragmatic bipartisan effort to give the District a voting member in the House, balanced against an additional seat for the traditionally Republican state of Utah, was sabotaged in 2009 by inclusion of a poisonous amendment that would have overturned the city’s gun-control laws.

As is true with many policy proposals, the idea of shrinking the district and creating a state from the rest needed time to make the rounds and gain support from lawmakers, activists and other proponents.

This whole situation would be downright amusing if it weren't sad for the people in DC. To the GOP, any Democrat proposing statehood is just after power. Ironically, as explicitly stated by numerous Republican lawmakers, it's also clear that the reason for intense resistance to this idea among Republicans is because of two new Democratic Senators (or power).

How is DC ever supposed to get representation in Congress in this case? This is how you end up with Democrats just saying saying to ram statehood through. Republicans are never going to support it because they don't want to empower their opposition. Meanwhile, there isn't exactly an avalanche of Democratic Senators kicking down Manchin's door to beat him into submission on statehood, even knowing it would make their ability to pass their agenda easier. In fact, HR1 and DC statehood are beginning to fall to the wayside, priority-wise.

Doesn't sound like Democrats are all about "power, power, power."

I never said it wasn’t equally a power grab among Republicans as well. Of course it is. But when both moves are power grabs, I just feel like keeping things the same is better than changing 240 years of precedent.

Muh BOTHsidz!1!

So now you back slid from it being unconstitutional to mere precedent? Jim Crow had precedent, why not keep it? Poll taxes, fraudulently applied literacy tests, etc etc etc. Bad ideas have precedent and such precedent should have zero precedential value in being broken.

[TheReckoning]

What rights are those? Electing senators isn’t a right.

Be honest with yourself. Democrats couldn’t care less about giving people voting rights. If they did, they would’ve made DC a state in 2009, when they had full Control of Congress. So why are they doing it now? 3 words.

Power, power, power.

They did try, and it was crafted to appease Republicans but died due to an unrelated amendment concerning gun control in DC. Nothing about what happened screams "power, power, power":

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-house-finally-voted-to-support-dc-statehood-its-a-needed-step/2019/03/12/f171771c-4434-11e9-8aab-95b8d80a1e4f_story.html

A promising and pragmatic bipartisan effort to give the District a voting member in the House, balanced against an additional seat for the traditionally Republican state of Utah, was sabotaged in 2009 by inclusion of a poisonous amendment that would have overturned the city’s gun-control laws.

As is true with many policy proposals, the idea of shrinking the district and creating a state from the rest needed time to make the rounds and gain support from lawmakers, activists and other proponents.

This whole situation would be downright amusing if it weren't sad for the people in DC. To the GOP, any Democrat proposing statehood is just after power. Ironically, as explicitly stated by numerous Republican lawmakers, it's also clear that the reason for intense resistance to this idea among Republicans is because of two new Democratic Senators (or power).

How is DC ever supposed to get representation in Congress in this case? This is how you end up with Democrats just saying saying to ram statehood through. Republicans are never going to support it because they don't want to empower their opposition. Meanwhile, there isn't exactly an avalanche of Democratic Senators kicking down Manchin's door to beat him into submission on statehood, even knowing it would make their ability to pass their agenda easier. In fact, HR1 and DC statehood are beginning to fall to the wayside, priority-wise.

Doesn't sound like Democrats are all about "power, power, power."

I never said it wasn’t equally a power grab among Republicans as well. Of course it is. But when both moves are power grabs, I just feel like keeping things the same is better than changing 240 years of precedent.

Muh BOTHsidz!1!

So now you back slid from it being unconstitutional to mere precedent? Jim Crow had precedent, why not keep it? Poll taxes, fraudulently applied literacy tests, etc etc etc. Bad ideas have precedent and such precedent should have zero precedential value in being broken.

The difference was, getting rid of Jim Crow wasn’t a power grab, and also, Jim Crow wasn’t anywhere near as much established as the fact that the Capital should not be able to use its power to prioritize itself.

[GALeftist]

What rights are those? Electing senators isn’t a right.

Be honest with yourself. Democrats couldn’t care less about giving people voting rights. If they did, they would’ve made DC a state in 2009, when they had full Control of Congress. So why are they doing it now? 3 words.

Power, power, power.

They did try, and it was crafted to appease Republicans but died due to an unrelated amendment concerning gun control in DC. Nothing about what happened screams "power, power, power":

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-house-finally-voted-to-support-dc-statehood-its-a-needed-step/2019/03/12/f171771c-4434-11e9-8aab-95b8d80a1e4f_story.html

A promising and pragmatic bipartisan effort to give the District a voting member in the House, balanced against an additional seat for the traditionally Republican state of Utah, was sabotaged in 2009 by inclusion of a poisonous amendment that would have overturned the city’s gun-control laws.

As is true with many policy proposals, the idea of shrinking the district and creating a state from the rest needed time to make the rounds and gain support from lawmakers, activists and other proponents.

This whole situation would be downright amusing if it weren't sad for the people in DC. To the GOP, any Democrat proposing statehood is just after power. Ironically, as explicitly stated by numerous Republican lawmakers, it's also clear that the reason for intense resistance to this idea among Republicans is because of two new Democratic Senators (or power).

How is DC ever supposed to get representation in Congress in this case? This is how you end up with Democrats just saying saying to ram statehood through. Republicans are never going to support it because they don't want to empower their opposition. Meanwhile, there isn't exactly an avalanche of Democratic Senators kicking down Manchin's door to beat him into submission on statehood, even knowing it would make their ability to pass their agenda easier. In fact, HR1 and DC statehood are beginning to fall to the wayside, priority-wise.

Doesn't sound like Democrats are all about "power, power, power."

I never said it wasn’t equally a power grab among Republicans as well. Of course it is. But when both moves are power grabs, I just feel like keeping things the same is better than changing 240 years of precedent.

Muh BOTHsidz!1!

So now you back slid from it being unconstitutional to mere precedent? Jim Crow had precedent, why not keep it? Poll taxes, fraudulently applied literacy tests, etc etc etc. Bad ideas have precedent and such precedent should have zero precedential value in being broken.

The difference was, getting rid of Jim Crow wasn’t a power grab, and also, Jim Crow wasn’t anywhere near as much established as the fact that the Capital should not be able to use its power to prioritize itself.

DC is, like, the only entity in the United States you can't reasonably argue is using its power to prioritize itself. It doesn't have any power right now, and after statehood it would be only one of 51 states and still wouldn't encompass most of the actual federal stuff like the White House or Capitol building, as I understand it. At best, it would only be able to prioritize itself to the extent that Vermont does so.

[Buffalo Mayor Young Kim]

What rights are those? Electing senators isn’t a right.

Be honest with yourself. Democrats couldn’t care less about giving people voting rights. If they did, they would’ve made DC a state in 2009, when they had full Control of Congress. So why are they doing it now? 3 words.

Power, power, power.

They did try, and it was crafted to appease Republicans but died due to an unrelated amendment concerning gun control in DC. Nothing about what happened screams "power, power, power":

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-house-finally-voted-to-support-dc-statehood-its-a-needed-step/2019/03/12/f171771c-4434-11e9-8aab-95b8d80a1e4f_story.html

A promising and pragmatic bipartisan effort to give the District a voting member in the House, balanced against an additional seat for the traditionally Republican state of Utah, was sabotaged in 2009 by inclusion of a poisonous amendment that would have overturned the city’s gun-control laws.

As is true with many policy proposals, the idea of shrinking the district and creating a state from the rest needed time to make the rounds and gain support from lawmakers, activists and other proponents.

This whole situation would be downright amusing if it weren't sad for the people in DC. To the GOP, any Democrat proposing statehood is just after power. Ironically, as explicitly stated by numerous Republican lawmakers, it's also clear that the reason for intense resistance to this idea among Republicans is because of two new Democratic Senators (or power).

How is DC ever supposed to get representation in Congress in this case? This is how you end up with Democrats just saying saying to ram statehood through. Republicans are never going to support it because they don't want to empower their opposition. Meanwhile, there isn't exactly an avalanche of Democratic Senators kicking down Manchin's door to beat him into submission on statehood, even knowing it would make their ability to pass their agenda easier. In fact, HR1 and DC statehood are beginning to fall to the wayside, priority-wise.

Doesn't sound like Democrats are all about "power, power, power."

I never said it wasn’t equally a power grab among Republicans as well. Of course it is. But when both moves are power grabs, I just feel like keeping things the same is better than changing 240 years of precedent.

Muh BOTHsidz!1!

So now you back slid from it being unconstitutional to mere precedent? Jim Crow had precedent, why not keep it? Poll taxes, fraudulently applied literacy tests, etc etc etc. Bad ideas have precedent and such precedent should have zero precedential value in being broken.

The difference was, getting rid of Jim Crow wasn’t a power grab, and also, Jim Crow wasn’t anywhere near as much established as the fact that the Capital should not be able to use its power to prioritize itself.

What is this even supposed to mean?